It seems that my understanding of impermanent (anicca) is different from some others on this forum. I thought it might be worth exploring these alternative ways of understanding impermanence.

So, what is my understanding? For me, impermanent means "capable of ceasing completely" or "vanishing". When applied to something like feelings which are continuously changing - it means the "complete ending of the process".

In your example, there is some "thing" inferred which is "capable of ceasing completely" or "vanishing". However, at a very deep level, because all things are devoid of inherent existence, this "thing" is but an abstraction.

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.

"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications......... (dependent origination sequence)"

So in reality there never was a "thing" to arise or vanish completely. What there is, is just a ceaseless process of transformation and change. It only comes to be seen as "arising" and "ceasing" when you objectify a "thing". That's touching on sunnata (emptiness)... but if you are going to observe in terms of dhammas, then knowing that the all dhammas are annica in the sense you detail is sufficient.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

It seems that my understanding of impermanent (anicca) is different from some others on this forum. I thought it might be worth exploring these alternative ways of understanding impermanence.

So, what is my understanding? For me, impermanent means "capable of ceasing completely" or "vanishing". When applied to something like feelings which are continuously changing - it means the "complete ending of the process".

What are your thoughts?

Best wishes, Vincent.

That isn't what anicca means. It can mean "impermanent", as in something that will cease, but it also means being subject to change (not necessarily continuous change, lest one gets into the mental gymnastics of momentariness and what-not).

I am struggling to understand your position. You appear to be saying that nothing ceases completely. What, then, is enlightenment - and how does it differ from the state of mind of an 'ordinary person'?

This definition, which the Tradition has always accepted, might be of assistance:

anicca'impermanent' (or, as abstract noun, aniccatā, 'impermanence') is the first of the three characteristics of existence (tilakkhana, q.v.). It is from the fact of impermanence that, in most texts, the other two characteristics, suffering (dukkha) and not-self (anattā), are derived (S.22. 15; Ud.IV. I)

"Impermanence of things is the rising, passing and changing of things, or the disappearance of things that have become or arisen. The meaning is that these things never persist in the same way, but that they are vanishing dissolving from moment to moment" (Vis.M. VII, 3).

Impermanence is a basic feature of all conditioned phenomena, be they material or mental, coarse or subtle, one's own or external: All formations are impermanent" (sabbe sankhārā aniccā; M. 35, Dhp. 277). That the totality of existence is impermanent is also often stated in terms of the five aggregates (khandha, q.v.), the twelve personal and external sense bases (āyatana q.v.), etc. Only Nibbāna (q.v.), which is unconditioned and not a formation (asankhata), is permanent (nicca, dhuva).

The insight leading to the first stage of deliverance, Stream-entry (sotāpatti; s. ariya-puggala), is often expressed in terms of impermanence: "Whatever is subject to origination, is subject to cessation" (s. Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, S.46. 11). In his last exhortation, before his Parinibbāna, the Buddha reminded his monks of the impermanence of existence as a spur to earnest effort: "Behold now, Bhikkhus, I exhort you: Formations are bound to vanish. Strive earnestly!" (vayadhammā sankhārā, appamādena sampādetha; D. 16).

Without the deep insight into the impermanence and insubstantiality of all phenomena of existence there is no attainment of deliverance. Hence comprehension of impermanence gained by direct meditative experience heads two lists of insight knowledge: (a) contemplation of impermanence (aniccānupassanā) is the first of the 18 chief kinds of insight (q.v.); (b) the contemplation of arising and vanishing (udayabbayānupassanā-ñāna) is the first of 9 kinds of knowledge which lead to the 'purification by knowledge and vision of the path-progress' (s. visuddhi, VI). - Contemplation of impermanence leads to the conditionless deliverance (animitta-vimokkha; s. vimokkha). As herein the faculty of confidence (saddhindriya) is outstanding, he who attains in that way the path of Stream-entry is called a faith-devotee (saddhānusārī; s. ariya-puggala) and at the seven higher stages he is called faith-liberated (saddhā-vimutta), - See also anicca-saññā.

---The trouble is that you think you have time------Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe------It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

I would rather base my understanding on the suttas not something written a thousand years later.

For me, anicca means 'capable of ceasing completely'. It is seeing that nirodha (cessation) applies to a particular mental construction (formation, sankhara).

"By knowing the destruction of formations be thou O Brahmin, one who knows the unmade" Dhp. 383.

"Monks, there is a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. Monks, if that not-born ... were not, there would be no escape here from what is born, become, made, compounded. But since, monks, there is a not-born ... therefore there is an escape from what is born, become, made, compounded". Itiv. 43. Translated by Nanananda, Concept and Reality, pages 71-72.

Everything that has been 'made' by the mind must vanish. But first you have to see what has been constructed and that it can disappear.

If you don't like the common one-word definition of "impermanent", try "evanescent" or "transient" as these are apt too.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

But if we were to speak in a momentary (or dare I say Abhidhammic?) sense, craving ceases with the arising of wholesome mindstates. The "next craving" is a brand new craving. Even each moment of that objectified "craving" is different... as is arises, changes, varies in intensity and passes away.

Each moment is a whole new moment, never repeated - even moments are inconstant.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

But if we were to speak in a momentary (or dare I say Abhidhammic?) sense, craving ceases with the arising of wholesome mindstates. The "next craving" is a brand new craving. Each moment is a whole new moment, never repeated - even moments are inconstant.

Metta,Retro.

Which is why abhidhammic systematisation, and its concept of momentariness, is such a load of poo-poo.

Funny, we can write a book on the different understandings of anicca- all of it would be valid as long as it leads to even an iota of letting go- giving up craving. But sometimes we can cling to our understanding of anicca and become defensive when another proposes his. More clinging.

the point of understanding anicca is to feel the change as it is happening and this sense that there is no point in all/any of it. no point trying to cling to anything, as all things are impermanant- unsatisfactory. this is the vipassana perspective. This leads to true letting go.

But if we were to speak in a momentary (or dare I say Abhidhammic?) sense, craving ceases with the arising of wholesome mindstates. The "next craving" is a brand new craving. Each moment is a whole new moment, never repeated - even moments are inconstant.

Metta,Retro.

Which is why abhidhammic systematisation, and its concept of momentariness, is such a load of poo-poo.

This is how some people read Dogen (the great Soto Zen master). I read it as saying pay attention to this moment and don't worry about permanent anything. In any case, craving is karmically conditioned, so the complete absence of craving (and roots of craving) in this moment cannot give rise to craving in the next moment. In other words, if this moment is completely enlightened (free of all defilements/attachments - present and latent) then so will the next one be.

Otherwise it really doesn't make sense. It's easy to be free of manifest defilements (say in meditation) this is not enlightenment and not what Dogen taught from what I understand.

vinasp wrote:So does the process of generating ever-new cravings end completely at some point?

Yes, upon attaining arahanthood, through the permanent destruction of ignorance.

Think here of the twelve-nidanas of dependent arising. If you don't get past ignorance, you don't get to craving.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

But if we were to speak in a momentary (or dare I say Abhidhammic?) sense, craving ceases with the arising of wholesome mindstates. The "next craving" is a brand new craving. Each moment is a whole new moment, never repeated - even moments are inconstant.

Metta,Retro.

Which is why abhidhammic systematisation, and its concept of momentariness, is such a load of poo-poo.

This is how some people read Dogen (the great Soto Zen master). I read it as saying pay attention to this moment and don't worry about permanent anything. In any case, craving is karmically conditioned, so the complete absence of craving (and roots of craving) in this moment cannot give rise to craving in the next moment. In other words, if this moment is completely enlightened (free of all defilements/attachments - present and latent) then so will the next one be.

Otherwise it really doesn't make sense. It's easy to be free of manifest defilements (say in meditation) this is not enlightenment and not what Dogen taught from what I understand.

_/|\_

The problem I have with "momentariness" (I can say nothing about Dogen, sorry) is that it seems to be taken too far, and people start losing sight of the forest for the trees. Not that there is anything inherently wrong in it per se.

seanpdx wrote:The problem I have with "momentariness" (I can say nothing about Dogen, sorry) is that it seems to be taken too far, and people start losing sight of the forest for the trees. Not that there is anything inherently wrong in it per se.

I think it's important to be able to see things both in a conventional and momentary sense, and to be able to distinguish between the two. I think it is difficult to overstate this point.

The truth of reality is that it is momentary, so ignoring momentariness is a risk too.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7